Allowed

Deorao Aasaram Warkad Died as Per Lrs Harishchandra Deorao Warkad and Another v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC6 Jan 2023WP/5476/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court disposed of three writ petitions challenging an order vacationing status quo in Atiyat Appeals. The court allowed the status quo to continue pending the appeals and directed the Collector to decide them within six months.

What did the court decide?

The order of status quo to continue; Atiyat Appeals to be decided within six months.

Deorao Aasaram Warkad Died as Per Lrs Harishchandra Deorao… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

6-WP-5476-2022.odt

¶2

SPChauhan

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 5476 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5481 OF 2022 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5485 OF 2022

¶5

Deorao Aasaram Warkad Died As per LRs Harishchandra Deorao Warkad and another … Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra and others … Respondent

¶8

Mr. D.P. Palodkar – Advocate for Petitioners Mr. N.T. Bhagat – AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 Mr. Y.K. Kakade – Advocate for Respondent No. 5

¶9

CORAM : GAURI GODSE, J. DATE : 06^th January, 2023

¶10

PER COURT :

¶11

In all these three Writ Petitions order dated 10^th May, 2022 passed by Collector Atiyat at Aurangabad in Atiyat Appeal nos. 95, 96, 97 of 2021 is challenged. By the impugned order, the Collector has vacated the order of status quo which was already granted in the said three Appeals. At the time of issuing notice this Court continued the order of status quo which is operative till today.

¶12

Perusal of the record shows that the petitioner is in possession since the year 1954. It is not disputed that the possession of 1/3

¶13

6-WP-5476-2022.odt

¶14

the petitioners is protected with respect to their respective lands by way of interim orders. Since the Appeals are pending, it will not be appropriate to vacate the status quo as the same will render the Atiyat Appeals infructuous.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find it appropriate that the Atiyat Appeals be decided within a time bound program and the order of status quo be continued during the pendency of Appeals.

¶16

Hence, following order is passed :

¶17

ORDER

¶18

i. The Atiyat Collector at Aurangabad shall decide the Atiyat Appeals nos. 95, 96, 97 of 202, after hearing all the parties within a period of six months from today.

¶19

ii. The Appeals shall be decided on its own merits, uninfluenced by the impugned orders and present order and in accordance with law.

¶20

iii. Order of status quo which was passed by the Atiyat Collector in Atiyat Appeal nos. 95, 96, 97 of 2021 will continue during the pendency of the Appeals.

¶21

2/3

¶22

6-WP-5476-2022.odt

¶23

iv. All the three Writ Petitions are disposed of in the

¶24

above terms.

¶25

[ GAURI GODSE ] JUDGE

¶26

3/3

Deorao Aasaram Warkad Died as Per Lrs Harishchandra Deorao Warkad and Another v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deorao Aasaram Warkad Died as Per Lrs Harishchandra Deorao Warkad and Another v. State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishnu Ramchandra Kulkarni L.Rs. Tilottama Vishnu Kulkarni and Ors. Vs Jambha Raoji Bhil L.Rs. Bhimabai Jambha Bhil and Ors.

Bajirao Girjaji More Vs Bhima Yadav Thorat and Others

Shabnaz Akbar Shaikh and Ors. Vs Sattar Khalil Khan Pathan and Ors.

Somnath Namdeo Nagare Vs Manda Baban Ghuge and Others

Somnath Namdeo Nagare Vs Manda Baban Ghuge and Others

Jaydeep Shivaji Mate Vs Elanco India Pvt. Ltd. through Its Managing Director